Member Movie Reviews

Keith A. (Keefer522) Reviewed on 6/1/2013...

Val Kilmer's lone turn as Batman is not the best of the series, but is still a entertaining enough entry.

By changing directors from Tim Burton to Joel Schumacher, the studio was obviously trying to turn the "Batman" series toward something a little brighter and campier than the first two Goth-inspired flicks. "Forever" still maintains some of the look of Burton's entries, but balances out the darkness of Kilmer's troubled Batman/Bruce Wayne with over-the-top hammy performances by Tommy Lee Jones (Two-Face) and Jim Carrey (Riddler). However, the introduction of Robin (Chris O'Donnell) feels shoehorned in and was not really necessary in my book... (Side note: where have you seen Chris O'Donnell lately? For that matter, where have you seen Val Kilmer lately?)

Oh, and bonus points for the addition of Nicole Kidman to the cast, who looked smokin' hot as the Batman-obsessed police psychologist, Dr. Chase Meridian.

This would be the last halfway-decent Batman movie for quite some time, as the series completely jumped the rails two years later with George Clooney's "Batman & Robin."

1 of 1 member(s) found this review helpful.

Movie Reviews

A really good watch, if not as dark as the previous films

Vanessa | Scotland, UK | 09/30/2005

(5 out of 5 stars)

"Okay okay,. everyone agrees that Tim Burton is the master of the Gothic, when it comes to films. Just look at some of the films he has done and that's proof enough. And everyone knows that Joel Schumacher isn't, plain and simple, neither does he have the impressive back-catalogue that Sir Burton has. (the only other film I have viewed by Schumacher is "The Lost Boys", which is actually a very good film. But it was the 80s, come on.)However, that does not deter this film from being a fantastic one. I like the way he mouled Gotham into a really cool, bright-coloured and still dark and gothic city, with amazing glowing clothes and buildings. It seems like a real party city, one you'd definitely want to swing by. In my opinion, Val Kilmer is a far better Batman than Micheal Keaton. To be Batman, you have to have the Bruce Wayne lips, as they are the only things you can really see with the mask on. And sure, Micheal Keaton had those. But take the mask off, and he just wasn't CONVINCING as Bruce Wayne. Not at all. However, Val Kilmer portrays Bruce Wayne perfectly; smooth and suave, and gorgeously serious. And then, as he steps into the suit, he is instantly the strong, tough Batman that we know and love. George Clooney was horrifying in this role, and I haven't yet seen Christian Bale's performance, but Val Kilmer is the winner, hands-down.The two bad guys in this outing are Two-Face (played by a demented Tommy Lee Jones) and The Riddler (played by an absolutely amazingly freaky Jim Carrey). It is extremely unusual seeing Tommy Lee Jones in a role like this. I have no idea why he took it, but I'm glad he did, as he shows Harvey Dent's split-personality monster man with a certain flair. Plus he looks fantastic in that costume.But Jim Carrey. Just wow. He is the most entertaining baddie I have ever seen in any movie, and that is a fact. His portrayal of Edward Nygma and his alter-ego is so hilariously silly and disturbing all at the same time, you sometimes wonder if he could possibly be two different people in the one body! He is an absolute joy to watch.Nicole Kidman is suitably sexy as Chase Meridian, and does a good job as the girl. There's is nothing oustanding about her performance, but she is enjoyable to watch.And Chris O'Donnell is extremely likeable in his role as the young cheeky orphan Dick Grayson, who becomes Robin, Batman's side-kick. The circus scene is one of the most dramatic and tragic scenes in the film, and is amazing to watch.Plus, the songs in the credits are absolutely AMAZING. Two of my favourite songs of all-time now, "Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me, Kill Me" by U2 and "Kiss From A Rose" by Seal are two gorgeously authentic songs. Amazing.This film is absolutely fantastic. I seriously recommend it, it is in my opinion the best one."

A New Look For The Bat

K. Fontenot | The Bayou State | 04/08/2004

(3 out of 5 stars)

""Batman Forever" isn't a top-tier comic-to-screen flick. What it is, however, is the best of the three subpar sequels of the "Batman" franchise so far. It's nowhere near as dark or moody as the first two movies, primarily due to the director, Joel Schumacher. It's a different type of film more akin to the cheesy TV series with Adam West. Don't get me wrong, it's still a fairly serious movie, but the mood of the film, from costumes to Gotham City, is more lighthearted than the first two films.Val Kilmer has been knocked often for playing "Batman." Honestly, I think he does a fine job. Expectations weren't as high for Michael Keaton, and when he pulled off the "Batman" character with style, audiences were blown away. Kilmer was merely considered too average. Playing Bruce Wayne wasn't considered much of a stretch for him, but he more than sufficed.The story runs along at a fairly decent pace. We're given the origins of "Robin," "Riddler," and "Two-Face." Once again, "Batman" has to fight two baddies at once, which is my largest complaint with all of the "Bat" sequels. Why do we need more than one villain in order to make a story interesting? As far as I'm concerned, there was no need for the "Two-Face" character. He was boring, out of place, and simply used to usher in the appearance of "Robin."The "Riddler" character was fun. A little over-the-top, but not annoying, Jim Carrey did a good job. I was actually worried about him going too far with the character.The rest of the cast is boring. The story is moderate, and the visuals are nice to look at, but that's all. Once again, effects have replaced the plot in order to drag in the largest demographic possible.In closing, "Batman Forever" is eye candy. It's cool to look at and fun to watch, but when all is said and done, you've witnessed a marketing tool to push toy and t-shirt sales. It's the best of the worst, so lets hope that a new sequel comes soon that will do the "Batman" franchise justice."

Kilmer is a great Batman

tom schreck | 12/05/2000

(4 out of 5 stars)

"I think Batman Forever is a very fun movie.It's not as good as the first Batman movie,but I liked it better than Batman Returns,which I thought was too dark and dreary.(although you have to love Michelle Pfeiffer as Catwoman)In Batman Forever Val Kilmer takes over the role of Bruce Wayne/Batman and does an outstanding job,although Michael Keaton is still the best Batman.Tommy Lee Jones as Two Face(formerly Gotham District Attorney Harvey Dent,who was played by Billy Dee Williams in the first Batman)and Jim Carrey as The Riddler are the films villains,and they both are very good.Nicole Kidman is very good and incredibly gorgeous as Dr.Chase Meridian,Bruce/Batman's love interest in this film.Chris O'Donnell plays Dick Grayson/Robin and isn't too bad.The special effects are excellent,and the soundtrack is good.Overall,while a lot of people might disagree with me,I really like Batman Forever."

Batman is indeed Forever...

Walter Lutsch | Gotham City | 06/25/2007

(4 out of 5 stars)

"I must tell you, for quite some time I did not like this movie. I have been a big fan of the Micheal Keaton movies, as well as the Animated Series of the 90's. This film marked Joel Schumakers first step into the Batman universe, and needless to say, it wasn't nearly as good as either of the Tim Burton films. However, as I watched this a few more times, and got past the "Its Schumaker!" I realized that even though Schumaker had made some really poor directors choices, there were not nearly as many as in his next Bat film, the one credited with single handedly ruining the franchise, Batman and Robin. Batman Forever, though riddled with campy moments, especially after the appearance of Robin, is still as a whole, a good Batman film. Val Kilmers performance as both Bruce Wayne and Batman actually surpasses Micheal Keatons, due to Val's very intense persona and tragedy stricken Bruce Wayne.

I would say that the worst part of this movie is how Schumaker portrayed the two main villians, Two-Face and the Riddler. The Riddler, who, in the comics was genius, thinking up crimes so sophisticated, he thought it only fair to leave behind riddles for the Batman to follow, was portrayed here by Jim Carrey, a lukewarm choice in my opinion. The character came off very much more like a Joker than a Riddler, and you'll see what I mean if you watch the film. Nowhere is the intelligent, calm and composed villian I expected.Secondly (ha, a pun worthy of Schumaker) Two-Face, possibly one of the most tragic and deadly of Batman's Rogues Gallery, is portrayed marginally by Tommy Lee Jones. Now, Jones was indeed the perfect person to play this character, and it is really too bad that his performance was limited to nothing more than hired muscle for the Riddler. Schumaker made his biggest mistake there, by not only cramming two villians of large scale like these into one film, but not taking the time to really use Two Face as he should have been done.

Nonetheless, Batman still manages to pull of some very good "Bat moments" ones that you have no choice but to look at and say "Wow.", in spite of his badly portrayed nemesis's.

In short, it isn't as good as Batman(1989), but it is definitely worth the watch, because even through Schumaker's mistakes, you can still see a definite veneer of Batman, pulling through the puns and neon lights."

An insult to the great burton/keaton films

tom schreck | eartg | 04/07/2004

(1 out of 5 stars)

"this movie is terrible, a stupid lighthearted awful movie that i really feel is a waste of time and money. two face is a joker ripoff, and the riddler in this film makes me appreciate frank gorshin. kilmer is awful as batman, robin is annoying as usual, stick with batman returns, anything after is garbage.nyc"